PC 1964-1965-1559! ~ i ~
'. ! `.J
RESOLUTION N0. 1_ 559' SERIES 1964-65
A RESOLUTION OF THE CTfY PLANNIIdG C011~ISSNN OF THE CITY OF ANAHEDN
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 1690 BE GRANTED
WHEREAS, the City Pleaaiag Commission of the City oE Meheim did eeceive a ved$ed Petition for Vadaace
6om RAY E. AND NANCY L. IAINERY, 1207 Chateau Avenue~ Anaheim, California~ Owners of certain
real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
described as Lot No. 83 of 'Iract No. 1421
; end
WHEREAS, the City Pleaaing Commissioa did hold a public headng et the City H411 ia the Ciry oE Anaheim
on March 15~ 1965~ at 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice of said public heariag heving been duly givea an roQuired
by lew and in accordence aith the provisioas of the Maheim Municipel Code, Chapter 18.68,to hear end consider
evidence for aed ageLast said proposed veriaace and to iaveetigete and meke findtags ead recommeadations ia connec-
tloa therewith; ead
WEIEREAS, seld Commisaion, aSer due inepection, lavestigation, aad study mnde by itaelf aad ia its behalf,
and aftac due coasideretioa of all evidence aad teports offe~ed es seid hearia6, does 8ad aad determiae the followlag
facts:
1. Thet the petitioner requests e vadance from the Maheim Mnnlcipal Codr. Sectiin 18.24.030 (2) for waiver
of the minimum 5 foot side..yard requirement to permit an addition to an existing single family
residence which will encroach to within 3 feet of the side lot line.
2. Thet there aee exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or coaditions applicable to the pmperty iavolved
or to the ia:eaded use oE t6e pcopeety that do not epply genereYly to tl-e proFe~ty or clns of nse ta the same vicinity
and sone.
3. Thet the ceqnested vartance is necessary for the prcaervnNon aad enjoyment of e substeatlal pmperty dght
possesaed by other pmpetty in the eame vicinity and :oae, and denied to the peoperty in questioa.
4. That the requested vartance will not be matedelly detrimental to the public aelfete or ia)udous to the p~
eRy or improvements in such vicinity aad zone in whieh the propecty is located.
5. That.the grant~ng.of .svb~act petition shail.not set a precedent for any future similar
requests that might be made for the area.
6. That no one appeared in opposition to subject petition.
Vl-G -1'
`_~ `)
NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT RESOLVED that the Aeaheim City Plenning Commiaeion does hereby grnnt subJect
Petitlon for Vadance, upoa the following ooaditions which are heceby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the pro-
posed use of the subject property ia order to pceserve the safety ead geaeral welfnre of the C1Uzens of ffie City of
Anaheim.
1. That sub~ect property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and
specifications on file with the City of Anaheim, marked Exhibit No. 1.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is stQued aad approved by me thie 25t of MaTCh~ 1965.
r ~
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIbI C1TY PL G CO!(61ISSION
ATTEST:
/ / ~J/~ ~
SECRETARY ANAHEDN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFOFtNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CTfY OF ANAHEIM )
I~ ~Inn Kr~9bs ~ Secr~tery of the City Plaaalag Commissioa of t6e City of Anaheim, do hereby cerUfy that the fore-
going resolutioo aas pesned and adopted at a meetiag of ffie City Plaaniag Commission of the CIty of Maheim, held oa
March 15, 1965, et 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYFS: ~OhO~tISSIONRRS: Allred, Camp~ Gauer, Herbst, llungall. Perry, Rowland.
NOES: COdWtISSIONERS: NanB.
AHSENT: COI~tISS10NERS: None.
IN 6iITNESS WHEREOF, I hwe heceunto set my haad thia 25th day of MarCh, 1965.
RESOLUTION NO. 1559
V2~G
~ /~~7~~~~`~J
SECRETARY ANAHEDH CITY PLANNIIVG COII~IlSSION
_2.
_ -- ~ _'1